(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.06.12 2015가단1571

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.06.12 2015가단1571

대여금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from January 1, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff alleged that he lent KRW 30 million to the defendant, and the defendant sought the payment of the above loan, the defendant asserts that it is difficult for the plaintiff to make a direct monetary transaction with the plaintiff, and that it is difficult for the plaintiff to borrow money from the plaintiff and make a direct monetary transaction with C, and that the defendant, after he borrowed money from the plaintiff and lent it to C, made the loan certificate of this case formally by requesting the plaintiff to pay the money to the plaintiff, and therefore, the defendant does not have any obligation to pay the above loan.

2. Determination

A. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the defendant prepared and delivered a loan certificate to the plaintiff on October 30, 2009 that "the defendant borrowed KRW 30 million from the plaintiff on October 30, 2009."

B. As long as the establishment of a disposal document is recognized as authentic, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof as to the denial of the contents stated therein (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da6753, Jun. 11, 2002). If the authenticity of the loan certificate of this case (Evidence A1) is recognized, the defendant shall be liable to the plaintiff for the same obligation as stated therein, and there is no clear and acceptable counter-proof to deny the contents stated therein.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff delay damages calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from January 1, 2015 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the day when the Plaintiff demanded the performance by serving the payment order of this case.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable and acceptable.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

참조판례

-대법원 2002. 6. 11. 선고 2002다6753 판결

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2018.01.10 2017가단22926

-대구지방법원 2019.05.08 2018나7588

-울산지방법원 2018.11.13 2018가단57959

-의정부지방법원 2018.1.10. 선고 2017가단22926 판결

-부산지방법원 2014.10.16 2014가합2788